Dear everybody
The scientific scope of TDA as we conceived it spans several astrophysical
sub-disciplines and therefore several IAU Divisions. This was the reason
that DivisionB was the appropriate umbrella to launch it from because the
activities of DivisionB span the science of all other divisions. If we
propose a WG now (which i am in favour of) its future course will be
determined primarily by the activities it conducts, and can be steered to
emerge the way the WG desires: science-focused and all of that.
WGs with limited goals are likely to fulfil them within a limited
time-frame and therefore are/will be temporary. On the other hand, TDA
belongs to the future and therefore, within the IAU structural definition,
its future is in becoming a commission. As long as we are under a
commission that is happy to incubate such a WG into a future commission
with a vision that we envisaged in our original proposal, I believe we will
be fine. There is already precedent to activities we visualise in the form
of the New Horizons meeting.
Regards
Prajval
On 26 April 2015 at 17:19, Keiichi Maeda <
keiichi.maeda at kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp> wrote:
> Hi all,
>> Under the situation, the WG sounds like a way to go. As mentioned by some
> of us, the data vs. division G is something we have to decide. Would it be
> possible to kind of cross-list the WD under a few divisions? Then consider
> that option. Otherwise, my personal/biased favorite is not on the data
> category as this represents only one face of the TD science (albeit it is
> an important and "hot" topic). Anyway, I am ok with either way. The most
> important thing is to keep the activity going on.
>> Cheers,
> Keiichi
>> =========================
> From: TDA_announce [mailto:tda_announce-bounces at timedomainastronomy.net]
> On Behalf Of G. C. Anupama
> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2015 10:55 AM
> To: Griffin, Elizabeth; Robert J. Hanisch;
>tda_announce at timedomainastronomy.net> Subject: Re: [TDA_announce] TDA in IAU
>> I agree to a TD WG, but not under data and documentation. As suggested by
> Elizabeth, Division G may be more appropriate.
>> Anupama
>>> ----
> G. C. Anupama
> Professor
> In Charge IAO & CREST
>> Sent from Samsung Mobile
> -------- Original message --------
> From: "Griffin, Elizabeth"
> Date:25/04/2015 23:59 (GMT+05:30)
> To: "Robert J. Hanisch" , tda_announce at timedomainastronomy.net> Subject: Re: [TDA_announce] TDA in IAU
>> Hi Bob,
>> Yes it may be unwieldy, but I was really trying to protect the TDA from a
> different fate - that of being labelled as "Data and Documentation", as the
> EC seems to want. I accept that if 'm the only minority voice then I will
> go along with what the rest want, but I would seriously recommend
> discussing with at least the President of Div G (Ignai Ribas, Spain) the
> possibility of a new WG being hosted by his Division instead (or as well).
> All of the topics now represented by Commissions of Div G were forefront
> topics at the TDA Symposium in 2011. I just believe it will be harder to
> "grow out of" a label that a TDA WG is only about data, than it will be to
> *include* that label from a more solid position within astrophysics. It
> would be equally difficult to emerge from a cradle within Astroinformatics
> and into astrophysics, without having earned the label of being only about
> data and computing.
>> Cheers,
>> Elizabeth
>> > It seems a bit unwieldy to me to create so many WGs, but that¹s really
> up to you all.
> _______________________________________________
> TDA_announce mailing list
>TDA_announce at timedomainastronomy.net>https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/tda_announce>> _______________________________________________
> TDA_announce mailing list
>TDA_announce at timedomainastronomy.net>https://pairlist3.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/tda_announce>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist3.pair.net/pipermail/tda_announce/attachments/20150427/7949740d/attachment.html>